DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 358 690 FL 020 837

AUTHOR Akindele, FemiTITLE Dialogue and Discourse in a Nigerian English

Fiction.PUB DATE 91NOTE 21p.; In: Ventola, Eija, Ed. Approaches to the

Analysis of Literary Discourse. Finland, Abo AcademyPress, 1991. p63-81; see FL 020 834.

PUB TYPE Reports Research/Technical (143)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Bilingualism; *Cultural Influences; *Discourse

Analysis; *Fiction; Foreign Countries; Interaction;Literary Criticism; Literary Styles; Prose; *SocialInfluences

IDENTIFIERS *English (Nigerian); *Nigeria

ABSTRACTAlthough many studies have been undertaken by

literary critics and styiisticians on African Eng"sh literary textsgenerally and Nigerian English prose fiction specifically, there hasbeen little or no analysis of dialogue and discourse in such texts.An examination of the phenomenon of speech as manifested inconversational pieces in Nigerian English prose fiction may not onlyenhance further interpretation of the text but may also point to theorganization of social interaction among Nigerians; particularly asNigerian English literary texts express indigenous culture and worldviews. In this article, the function of dialogues in the overalldevelopment of Nigerian English prose fiction is explored and anattempt is made to see whether the fictionalized dialogues haverelevance for discourse realities within the Nigerian social system.In addition to providing an overview of the major characters andthemes of Nigerian fiction, this analysis of an Igbo English literarytext seems to support the hypothesis that Nigerian English discoursestructure In literary texts is to some extent governed bysocio-cultural factors (such as age and achievement) present in thesociety itself. (Contains 30 references.) (JL)

*** ** **** ******** ****** *********** icy **** ***** ****** *** * *** ****** ** *****

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

***********************************************************************

Dialogue and discourse ina Nigerian English Fiction

by Femi Akindele

in

Approaches to the analysisof literary discourseedited by Eija Ventola

1991

Published by Abo Akademis Forlag-AboPress, Abo, Finland

U S DEPARTMENT OF EOUCATIONOffice of E duEationat Research and ImprovementEDUCATIONAL RF SOURCES INFORMATIONCE Nil R (ERIC)

1Cath*S. document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizahonorigfnalingMinor changes have been made. in .rnpniveqiiii0(itiCtion duality

Points of view or opinions stated in this dor umen( do not necessarily represent off iciai0E10 Posaion or bob,-

Academy

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONALRESOURCES

INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC!

DIALOGUE AND DISCOURSE IN A NIGERIAN ENGLISH FICTION1

Femi Aldndele

kDbafemi Awolowo University

1. Introduction

Several studies have been undertaken by literary critics and stylisticians on African

English literary texts generally and Nigerian English prose fiction specifically. But little

or no analysis of dialogue and discourse in such texts have been considered. Yet, it

does seem that an examination of the phenomenon of speech as manifested in

conversational pieces in English prose fiction may not only enhance further

interpretation of the text but may also point to the organisation of social interaction

among Nigerians. This is particularly so when one considers the fact that Nigerian

English literary texts have their own peculiarities based on the expression of indigenous

culture and world views.

In this article, the function of dialogues in the overall development of Nigerian

English prose fiction is explored. The article explores how the organisation of

conversation enhances theme development and character differentiation. The article also

makes an attempt to see whether the fictionalised dialogues have relevance for

discourse realities within the Nigerian social system.

2. Nigerian English prose fiction as a bilingual phenomenon

Any Nigerian English literary work is a bilingual phenomenon which relates to

linguistic and socio-linguistic dimensions of language acquisition and usage. It is a

translation of the peoples world views or culture which may be linguistic a. socio-

63

a

r

- cultural. The level of translation varies according to the individual writer's point on the

scale of bilingualism which can be represented as in Figure 1:

Upper Scale

Middle Scale

Lower Scale

kxxxxxN..)%xX A

A XX k X )r)(XXX

Figure 1. Author's point on the scale of bilingualism.

The upper scale is made up of sophisticated bilingual writers. This is the point on the

scale where very literate Nigerian English writers can be located. Such writers include

Chinua Achebe whose works are used as data in this paper, Wole Soyinka and Festus

IyayP. The middle scale represents the location of writers that are literate but not very

sophisticated, e.g. T. M. Aluko, Elechi Amadi3. At the lower scale are located writers

that can be regarded as apparent translators in that they are not very literate in English,

e.g. Amos Tutuola4.

3. Literary criticism and stylistics approaches

Studies in African prose fiction and indeed Nigerian English prose fiction have largely

been carried out by practitioners of literary criticism (see, for instance, Palmer 1972;

Killam 1969). In the texts, issues such as characterization, plot, and theme or message

are discussed. There is no discussion of the place of dialogues in the texts. Linguists

have r,Iso started to work on African literary texts in English and specifically on Nigerian

English prose fiction. This kind of linguistic work on stylistic features in the writings of

Nigerian English prose writers marks a beginning in the examination of African

64

4

English literary texts from the linguistic viewpoint.

Oshundare (1979) takes Young's work further by focusing on bilingual and

bicultural aspects of Nigerian prose fiction. He discusses in particularthe bilingual and

bicultural features shown in the styles of Tutuola, Ekwensi, Achebe, and SoyinRa.

This work shows some awareness of the use of English in Nigeria and some problem

areas for the novelist as well as for the international community of masters.

Adejare (1981) attempts a linguistic analysis of a Nigerian English literary text. In

examining the style of Wole Soyinka's selected texts, he proposes a textlinguistic

approach based on systemic linguistics. He identifies three levels of meaning,

Primitive, Prime Order, and Second Order, and links these with the concept of

metaphor in language use. These, and other concepts like collocation, cohesion, and

translation theory, are used to provide interpretations for the texts selected. Thework

can be regarded as one of the major efforts in the application of linguistics to non-native

Nigerian English literary text analysis. It has contributed greatly to the general

understanding of English as a second language and to the identification of an

appropriate description of the features of a Nigerian English literary variety from the

perspective of a writer's literary idiolect. However, the work does not consider the

place of dialogues or conversations in the overall frame of the literary texts.

Oyeleye (1985) moves away from a general treatment of Nigerian English prose

fiction an the specific literary genres of Chinua Achebe. He examines the 'language of

Achebe's Things Fall Apart in the context of Nigerian English. He considers what he

calls 'local colour' observed in both literate and semi-literate speech in the novels.

These include the use of proverbs, wise cracks, and aphorisms. No particular linguistic

analysis of these features is undertaken. They are simply considered as rhetorical

devices in the hands of a practised conversationalist. Although conversation is

considered as an important and highly skilful art in the novels examined, no attempt is

made to examine its structural organisation.

65

4. The structure of dialogue in Nigerian English prose fiction

Efforts have been made to improve on the theories of discourse proposed by

ethnomethodologists, such as Sacks, Schegloff & Jefferson (1974), and linguists,

such as Sinclair & Coulthard (1975), and others. Such improvements vary from a

consideration of discourse as an exchange system to its application to both highly

structured and less structured conversational data (Coulthard & Brazil 1979; Harris

1980; Akindele 1986). Indeed efforts have been made lately to extend systemic

network theory to the understanding of not only the exchange structure, but also that of

global generic structures ( Ventola 1979, 1987, 1988). Such discussions have proved to

be very useful in the analysis of discour.e (Ventola 1987).

In this section, we shall evaluate the development of generic structure theory and

then show how it could help in analyzing the conversation pieces in a Nigerian English

prose fiction. A working definition of the concept of 'dialogue' in this article may be

useful at this point.

Dialogue as fictionalised conversation is considered as a sub-genre within the

macro-genre of prose fiction which is "realised by register, which in turn is realised by

language" (Butler 1989: 16). As a sub-genre, dialogue shows "how things get done,

when language is used to accomplish them" (Martin 1985: 250). Irnmeeli2r&ly we notice

a dynamic procedural emphasis. Genre, such as conversation, constraints the

combinations of field, tenor, and mode selections which are legitimised in a culture.

Genre has also been considered as "a typified socially recognized form that is used in

typified social circumstances" (Dudley-Evans 1986:1).

Berry (1981a, b, c) observes that there are problems with the linear approach to the

analysis of interactional discourse proposed by Sinclair & Coulthard (1975) and the

subsequent modifications of it (Coulthard & Brazil 1979; Burton 1980). She agues

that a linear approach to exchange structure "does not allow one to take account of

enough similarities and differences ... [but] different patterns of organization are

observable in the discourse at the same time" (Berry 1981a: 121). She then proposes a

66

multilayered exchange system which enables the prediction of structures in an

exchange.

Ventola (1987) observes that the Birmingham School model is very inadequate from

the point of view of global generic structures. She points out that the analysis of

categories and the structure of the highest unit, the lesson, is never reached and,

further, that the global generic st.uctures have largely been ignored. This problem has

also been pointed out in my earlier work on family conversation (Akinde le 1986).

Ventola and others have argued for the presentation of a text not only as a static

product but also as a dynamic process. That is, when a person is involved in an

interaction, the negotiation with the co-participant on how to proceed the interaction

begins. In the process, the planned unfolding of the interaction may change, and these

changes have to be matched (Martin 1985). (For a further discussion, sec Vcntola

1987, 1988.) In an attempt to account for both the product and processof interaction,

Ventola (1987) modified Berry's (1981 a, b, c) proposed exchange systems and

synthesized it with Martin's (1985) work on speech functions. This synthesis can

prove helpful for the analysis of conversation pieces in Nigerian prose fiction, though

some slight modifications are necessary due to the nature of the data Hence we will

summarise Ventola's presentation of the exchange structure of texts and show how it is

related to the data given in this article.

Following Berry (1981a, c), Vento la (1979: 97) presents the following structural

functional slot formula which constrains sequencing in moves:

((D X I) X 2) X 1(X 2 f (X 1 0)

This suggests that in an exchange, at least one slot Xl has to be realized. That is X1 is

obligatory. Other functions are sequentially ordered so that DX1 may only precede X2,

which may in turn occur before Xl, which may only be followed by X2f, which in

turn may be followed by Xlf. The functional slots also determine each other's

obligatoriness: Xl is obligatory, X2 presupposes the function XI in an exchange, DX1

predicts both X2 and XI and finally, X2f again presupposes X1 and Xlf presupposes

Xlf. Each function can occur only once in an exchange.

67 rr

The exchanges which are concerned with negotiating information are either

knowledge-orientated or action-orientated. The X in the slots above can then be

replaced by either K (knowledge) or A (action), (X1 = KI/A1).

The number 1 in K1 stands for the knowledge-orientated slot of a Primary Knower,

the person who already knows the information (Berry 1981a: 126) and imparts it for

the benefit of the other interactants, as in (1) from A Man of The People by Chin=

Achel:e.

(1) K1 0: I an a teacher at the Grammar ShootAl P: Here is your food roaster

Al stands for the action-oriented slot of a Primary Actor, the person who is actually

going to carry out the action (Berry 1981c: 23). (Note that the subsequent examples

used in this article are from Achebe's A Man of the People, except for Examples (17)

and (18), which are drawn from Achebe's Arrow of God.)

The Primary Knower or Actor does something for the benefit of tbz. other participant

present; the other participant present is the Secondary Knower or Actor. Having

benefitted from a move in the Primary Knower or Actor slot, the Secondary Knower or

Actor feels that he ought to acknowledge the preceding move. Such an

acknowlegement is carried out in a K2f/A2f slot - the Secondary Knower's follow-up

in knowledge and Action exchanges as shown in (2).

(2) K1 N: They are going to give me doctorate degree, Doctor of Laws LLDK2f 0: That's greatAl P: Here is your food masterA2f A: Oh thanks

In a K2, the Secondary Knower asks the Primary Knowler to impart knowledge for his

benefit, as in (3).

(3) K2 MN: What do you want hereK1 0: I only came to say good bye

In contrast, in an A2 a request to the primary actor to do something for the benefit of

the secondary actor is made, as in (4).

(4) A2 0: Can I have some brandyAl N: Of course

A K2 or an A2 may itself be optional, but, once realised it must be followed by a K1 Cr

68

1

in Al.

The Primary Knower or Actor may decide to delay the KI or Al slot; hence a DK1

slot or a DA1 slot. In a DK1, the Primary Knower delays his admission that he knows

the information in order to find out whether the Secondary Knower also knows the

information as in (5).

(5) DK1 A: What made Chief Nanga popularK2 B: His village activitiesK1 A: His political skill

In a DA1, the Primary Acts delays the action to ensure the acceptability of the action to

Secondary Actor, as for example in (6).

(6) DA1 P: Can I bring your food masterA2 A: Oh yesAl P: I don put am for tabie sir

In an exchange, a DK1 or a DA1 slot must be followed by a K2 or aA2, which in nun

must be followed by a Ki or a Al, which can optionally be followed by a K2f or a

A2f. The choice of any of the sequences depends on whether the speaker of the first

move in an exchange is orientated to 'A - events' or 'B-events' (Labov & Fanshel

lc 72; Labov & Fanshel 1977). In 'A-events', the first speaker has to be a Primary

Knower or Actor. Thus the exchange classified as 'A-events' will startwith a Kl or an

Al slot or a DK1 or a DA1 slot as shown in (7).

(7) K1 Mrs. Akilo: My husband and I practise jointlyIC2f 0: OhAl Nanga: Here is your brandy OdiliAlf Odili: Thanks

If the slot is a DK1 or a DA1 in an 'A- event', the knowledge or action in the exchange

is negotiated (delayed) whereas the non-negotiated A-events start with a K1 or a Al

slot. 'B-events' however, start with K2 or A2 slots. In S-events', A cannot be the

first speaker because A is not the Primary Knower or Actor, as in (8).

(8) K2 0: Are you in private businessK1 Akio: Oh yesA2 A: Give me jolof rice PeterAl P: Yes sir

With an Alf, the Secondary Actor may acknowledge his appreciation of the Primary

ICnuwer's action done in benefit of the Secondary Actor, as shown in (9).

a 69 5

(9) DA1 0: Shall I give master drinkA2 Max: YesAl 0: OkayA2f Max: ThanksAlf 0: Not at all

A similar exchange can also be realised in a knowledge-orientated event It is a kind of

'feedback on feedback often used in casual conversation as a strategy for enforcing

speaker change (see Ventola 1979, 1987: 101).

In an action exchange, an immediate action could take place, hence a slot Al: React.

But when the action is postponed, because it cannot be performed immediately, then a

slot Al: Assent is considered sufficient to complete an action exchange, as in (10):

(10) Al: Assent P: The food will soon dey ready sirI'll bring it quick

Alf A: OkayAl: React P: (non-verbal action).

The knowledge- and action-orientated exchanges discussed above are examples of

dialogues in Nigerian prose fiction as illustrated by these excerpts from Chinua

Achebe's A Man of the People. There is, however, another type of exchange which I

identified in family conversation and labelled a Prefatory (Akindele 1988). Ventola

(1987) identifies such an exchange in service encounters and refers to it as attention-

orientated and greeting exchanges. A prefatory-orientated exchange fixes the attention

for the interaction and involves a Prefatory slot (Pr) which can be responded to in a

Response to Prefatory (RPr) slot, as shown in (11).

(11) Pr Of: OdiitRPr 0: SirPr °duck: FalherRfr Ezeulu: uhuhPr Oduche: I have a word to sayRPr Ezeulu: I'm listening

There are also two types of greeting exchanges observable in the prose dialogues. The

first type is the opening greeting (Gr). The second type is the closing greeting, a

Goodbye (Gb). Both have their corresponding pairs, a response to greeting (RGr) and

a response to goodbye (RGb). Opening and Closing greetings are exemplified in (12)

and (13) respectively.

70

(12) Gr 0: Good morning Mrs. NangaRGr MN: Morning OdiliGr N: Hello! Odili my great enemyRGr 0: Hello

(13) Gb Max: Goodbye OdiliRGb 0: Bye Max

The dialogues in Nigerian prose fiction further manifest 'dynamic moves' in

exchanges labelled as 'suspending moves' (Ventola 1987: 105-107). These types of

moves have been recognised by a number of conversational analysts and have been

given vadous labels - 'side sequences', 'insertion sequences', 'repairs', etc. (see

Jefferson 1972; Goffman 1976; Burton 1980; Harris 1980; Martin 1985; Akindcle

1986).

Suspending moves are used as "a kind of tracking device which focus on

experiential content of a preceding move and check to make sure it has been heard

correctly" (Ventola 1987: 105). They concentrate on checking and giving assurance

about the transmission of knowledge or action. They could be 'challenges', 'checks',

'back-channels', etc. These dynamic moves help to capture participants' orientation to

the making of conversation. A check (check) and a response to a check (rcheck) are

illustrated in Example (14) and a backchannel move (bch) in Example (15).

(14) K2 0: Who's shecheck A: whorc:heck 0: The girl with the MinisterK1 A: His girl friendK2f 0: I see

(15) K1 0: We met at the day Chief Nanga lectured...bch Eddy: YesK1 0: I am a teacher at the Grammar Schoolbch Eddy: Uhuh

The preceding discussion has briefly touched on some aspects of the organisation of

conversation in Nigerian English prose fiction. In the next section I shall analyse

conversation pieces in some of the texts selected for this study and then attempt to show

how they help to highlight theme(s) and character differentiation.

5. Analysis of the dialogic texts

It seems appropriate here to discuss the choice of the text selected as data. Chinua

71

Achebe's A Man of the People has been chosen for the analysis. The text is a political

satire, that is, an expose of ministerial incompetence and cccruption, social inequalities,

rigged elections, thuggery, poverty and disease, female oppression, mass indifference

and cynicism, and intellectual bankruptcy. Achebe's literary idiolect is written from the

perspective of Igbo culture. The Igbos are one of the three major ethnic groups and

languages in Nigeria. The remaining two Ire Hausa and Yoruba5. Achebe represents

Igbo world views and sensibilities in his literary texts. In addition to Achebe's A Man

of the People, references are made to Arrow ofGod by the same writer for the purpose

of comparison. In analysing the dialogues in the literary texts used as data, I have tried

to identify each of the participants in brackets immediately after the contributions, for

example, OF: Shut up (shouted my father), is Odili's father (OF) in line 23 of Example

(16).

In Example (16) below, Chief Nanga, the politician, opens the conversation with an

opening greeting. He greets a much younger participant, Will, in the discourse. It is

interesting to note that the greeting is not a genuine one but rather a sarcastic one in

nature, as shown in lire 1. We know this is so because it is very unusual in this type of

culture for an older person to greet the younger person first in a social interaction. The

older participant would only do this in a sarcastic manner, or if the younger one did not

see him at first sight. The subsequent knowledge-orientated exchanges produced by

both Chief Nanga, the politician, and Odili's father, who is also present, suggest that

there is a quarrel between Othli and the polierlan.

(16) N = Nanga; 0 = Odili; OF = Odili's father, = Point of interruption

N: Hello! Odin, my great enemy (greeted 1) OpeningChief Nanga in most daring assault) Greeting/

Prefatorir Exchange

0: Hello (I said as flat as the door)OF: Did you see the Chief Honourable Minister

yesterday (asked my father severely) 3

0: No 4N: Let him be sir (Chief Nanga) 5

He and I like to say harsh things to each other 6Don't worry about Odili, sir 7

OF: Yes - 8But be should wait till he builds his own housethen he may put his head into a pot there not here

t 4,72

N:

OF:N:

OF:0:

OF:

0:

N:0:

OF:

OF:N:OF:

N:OF:0:OF:0:OF:0:OF:

N:OF:

0:OF:

0:OF;

in my house. 9If he has no respect for me why should he carryhis foolishness to such an important guest(said my father)Never mind sirrm no guest hereI regard here as my house and yourself asmy fatherYesThey hear that Chief Nanga has eaten 10percent commission and they begin to breaktheir beads and holder up and downThey don't know that all the coeornissicets arepaid into party fundsThat's right (said my father knowingly)I sup, se your new 4-storeyed building isgoing to be party headquarters (I asked)Chief the honourable Minister was nottaking to you (said my father boldly)Naturally be wouldn't because he knows Iknow what he knowsWhat**The buses, for instance, we all know are forcarrying the party. and the import duty...* 22Shut up (shiuted my father) 23) Regulatory

Negative ExchangeKeep quiet (I s-arefully withdrew from 24) Regulatorythe talk) Negative ExchangeLeave him alone, sir 25When he finishes advertising his ignoranceI will educate him (said Chief Nanga)Thank youHave you finished, Mr. NationalistDon't mind him, ChiefLet us go into the house (said my father)(he goes in with Odili's father)Odili (shouted my father)Sir (I answered full of respect)Come in hen (be said)(goes in) (I took my time to get up and walk over)Sit down - we don't eat people (he said to me)(sits down) (I sat down ostentatiously)When a mad man walks naked it is hiskinsmen who feel shame not himselfYes (acknowledged Chief Nanga)So I have been begging Chief Nanga forforgiveness on your behalfHow could you go to his house asking forhis help and eating his food and thenspitting in his faceI did not*Let me finish

101112

1314

15

1617

18

19

2021

You did not tell me all these things-thatyou abused him in public and left his houseto plot his down fall.I did...*I said let me finish

73

262728293031323334353637

3839

40

414243) Regulatory

Negative Exchange

444546) Regulatory

0:OF:

0:OF:

N:

OF:N:

OF:

Not that you even say anything to me, whyshould youDo I know book?Am I not of the Old TestamentI..It me finish

(non-verbal)Inspite of your behaviour Chief Nanga hascontinued to struggle for you and has nowbrought you the scholarship to your houseOn top of that he has brought you £250.00if you will sign this paper (be help up apiece of paper)Don't say I am interrupting you, Sir(said Chief Nanga)Go on (said my father)I don't want Odili to misunderstand merm not afraid of you. You will lose yourdeposit and disgrace yourselfrm only giving you this money because I feelthat after all my years of service to raypeople, I deserve to be elected unopposed sothat my detractors in Bori will know that Ihave my people solidly behind meThat is the only reason I am giving youthis moneyI know those irresponsible boys havegiven you moneyWe know where the money come fromWe will deal with them after the electionWe will show themUhuh - yes

(from Chinua Achsebe's A Man of the

Negative Exchange

4748495051) Regulatory

Negative Exchange

5253)Petmission-

Set,ing Exchange5455

56

57

58

5960616263

People, pages 24-25)

Of particular interest to the discourse analyst isthe way the organization of the turn-

taking system contributes to the understanding ofthe genre. Social hierarchy based on

age is shown to be a factor and Chief Nanga is portrayed to dominate the conversation.

But, the control of the discourse is in the hands of Odili's father, with Chief Nanga

joining into the talk as a kind of an 'equal' conversational partner. That Chief Nanga is

subordinate to Odili's father in terms of age in the conversation is shown by his use of

'Sir' in lines 5, 7, and 11.

In contrast, Odili, a young school teacher is portrayed as a participant who occupies

a lower social position in the interaction. His contributions are made minimal and are

only allowed when his father decides that he (his father) has finished with his talk. He

is thus asked not to initiate any talk, but only to respond to certain allegations made

74 1 ,;

against him.

Interruption is a phenomenon of discourse that speakers are expected to try to avoid.

'Younger co-conversationalists are in fact 'forbidden' to interrupt older participants in

the Igbo culture. Hence Odili is censored every time he wants to cut into his father's

turn and make his contributions. This is marked byShut up (line 23), keep quiet (line

24), Let me finish (line 43), I said let me finish (line 46), which initiate what I have

labelled 'Regulatory Negative exchanges' in my study on Yoruba English discourse

(Akindele 1988: 113). The fact that Odili is reprimanded by his father for interrupting

him is a demonstration of the power associated with the hierarchy of higher social status

and evidence of the subordinate role that younger conversationalists are expected to play

not only in interactional activities but also in thedecision-making process.

The demonstration of the power of social status is further lightened in lines 32-37 in

Example (16) when Cdili's father employs very strongDirectives', Come in here, Sit

down, which Odili conkilies to immediately. All these have some implications for the

character differentiation in A Man of the People. First, these show that a person like

Nanga, despite being a semi-literate, considers himself more qualified and suitable for a

leadership post than Odili - a young, energetic, and very literate school teacher. Second,

Chief Nanga's place within the social hierarch" may also account for his corruption,

political thuggery, rigging of elections, mass indifference to people's yearning. He has

access to power because of the support he receives from semi-literate associates like

Odili's father. Odili, on the other hand, is a character who is not only poor but lacks

both the social and the economic power to challenge theatrocities of Nanga. Odili is

repressed by the society which considers him worthless in terms of leadership, though

literate.

The turn taking system in Example (16) points to one significant underlining

message of the text in this genre. This has to do with the concept of democracy which

the politicians intend to usher in. In fact, democracy is questionable in this context

because of the apparent 'inequalities' in social activities and indeed in the decision-

making process in the society. One can thus argue that the conceptof democracy being

75 1 5

preached in the genre is a farce. The notion of age worship is further strengthened in

Example (16) when Chief Nanga (though awealthy man and higher than Odili's father

in terms of social status based on achievement), before cutting in, seeks permission to

initiate a series of exchanges. He does this by using the 'permission-seeking' type of

Prefatory exchange, Dor:: say I'm intermixing you, sir, after which he is allowed to

Go on (see lines 53-54; for Prefatory Exchanges, see Akindele 1988: 107). Chief

Nanga's deference to Odili's father can partly be interpreted as respect for age and

partly as a means of eliciting support from the older group which in turn controls the

younger ones.

The extract also reveals the theme of corruption. Chief Nanga is portrayed through

the conversation piece as a corrupt, shameless, and heartless politician who could do

anything to remain in power. Politics is also shown to be a dirty exercise which people

of Nanga's type engage in. Indeed, Odili's father is shown to be a person of Nanga's

type who does not see anything wrong in bribery, corruption, and the act ofwasteful

spending of government funds. Odili is portniced in the scene as a person who is

determined to stop Chief Nanga from continuing with his political thuggery. He is a

man who would not be lured by mere material wealth, hence his rejection of Nanga's

offer of scholarship and money.

The theme of oppression of women created in Nigerian prose fiction is illustrated in

Example (17) below. Women are considered as instruments to be used and dumped

whenever a better alternative can be found. They are not seen as objects to be honoured

and respected but are rather perceived as baby-producing machines. Example (17)

illustrates the image of women in the fictionalised society created in Arrow of God,

also attested in almost all Achebe's works.

(17) Ezeulu = father; Obika = Sort, Matefi = mother

Ezeulu: What is it, my son 1

Obika: Nothing 2Matefi: What is it, Obika 3

Ezeulu: Keep quiet 4) RegulatoryNegative Exchange

Matefi: (non-verbal) 5

Ezeulu: What did you see, Obika 6

1 -'76 U

Obila: A flash of lightning 7Ezeulu: What happened when you saw it 8Obi cr I know it was a spirit my head swelled 9Ezeulu: What did he look like 10

Obika: Taller than any man I know 11

Era du: You have seen Eru, the magnificent,the one that gives wealth to those whofound favour with him 12

For instance, in Example (17) the social status of Matefi, the wife of Ezeulu, is reduced

to the level of that of her children. Ezeulu is totally in control of the conversation, and

immediately Matefi attempts to make her own contribution without first seeking

permission from her 'boss', she is reprimanded by, for example, Keep quiet (line 4). It

should be noted that although socially she and Ezeulu can be placed on the same social

hierarchy within the family setting, her sex leads to a sub-stratification within the

hierarchy, which makes her a subordinate to the male sex.

It is also interesting to note that 'prov.rbs' which are considered as the exclusive

linguistic and conversational strategy province of elders are mostly produced by the

male. It is only on a few occasions that women are portrayed using them in Achebe's

texts. Their effective use symbolises the power and status of the speaker within the

exclusive world of male politics and public affairs: a world in which women do not

participate and from which they are seen to be conspicuously absent. This creates the

impression of linguistic and intellectual apartheid.

Structurally, out of the long stretches of conversation in Examples (17) and (18),

only a small fraction is produced by women or they play a role in the passages.

Women's talk occurs when women join others in responding to a man's initiation

which draws ovation or surprises from the audience, or when women are overtly or

covertly requested to make their contributions to the ongoing discourse. The

organisation of the conversation in Examples (17) and (18) is thus a demonstration of

the employment of social hierarchy in relation to the use of power and thedominance of

women by men.

The structure of father/children conversation is revealed in (18) below.

(18) Ezeulu x father, Edogo = eldest son; Obika = son; Oduche x youngest son

Edogo: Tomorrow is Afo

77 71

F7enlin Yes 2&logo: We have come to find out what work

you have fee us 3

Ezeulu: How much of the work on the newhomestead was still undone 4

Edogo: Only the women's barn 5But that oalikl wait 6

Ezeulu: Nothing will wait 7Edogo: A wife should DM come into an

unfinished homestead 8

Ezeulu: Yes 9()cloche: Father, I have a word to say 10) Permission-

seeking Exchange

Ezeulu: I am listening 11

Obika: Perhaps they are fothiddes to helptheir brothers build a barn 12

Edogo: Has Oduche not worked as hard asyourself on your homestead 13

Obika: Yes 14

Ezeulu: It is Oduche I'm waiting to bear, 15) Regulatorynot you jealous :fife. Negative Exchange

Edogo: I am one of those chosen to go to Okperitomorrow and bring the leads for ournew teacher 16

Ezeulu: Yes 17But tell them that tomorrow is theday on which my sons and my wivesand my son's wife work for me 18Do you hear me 19

Edogo: I hear you.

(from Cbinua Achebe's Arrow of God, pages 15-16)

As can be seen from Example (18), age is aLso given its place in the organisation of the

talk. The older children, Edogo and Obika, and their father Ezeulu were given the

higher social position in the hierarchy while Oducheoccupies the lower position. The

occupants of the higher position dominate and control the discourse while the younger

one is relegated to the background. This is clearly shown in an attempt by Oduche to

get into the pool of the on-going conversation. He uses the 'Permission-seeking'

Prefatory Exchange characteristic of Yoruba family conversation to gain access to the

talk; Oduche: Father, I have a word to say - Farther: I'm listening (for Prefatory

Exchange, see Akindele 1988).

Interruption is also a phenomenon that seems to be 'forbidden' by other younger

children in a father/children interaction in the fictionalised Igbo society-, hence Obika is

reprimanded when he attempts to punctuate his brother's contributions; Ezeulu: It is

Oduche I'm waiting so hear, not you Jealous wife.7'

78

6. Conclusion

I have in this article tried to show that conversation pieces in prose fiction could further

the interpretation of a literary text. The discussion of the structure of the dialogues

seems to have been able to give the reader some insights into some of the major

characters and themes of the prose fiction. The analysis further points to the fact that

age is a determinant factor in the fictionalised Nigerian English prose fiction just as it is

in the social life of the people. The consequences of the analysis of sample dialogic data

from Igbo English literary text seems to support the hypothesis made in my earlier

work (Akindele 1986) that Nigerian English discourse structure when represented in

literary texts, is to some extent, governed by socio-cultural factors such as age and

achievement present in the society itself.

Department of English LanguageObafemi Awolowo University

Nigeria

Footnotes

1 I am grateful to Hilary Hillier, Jean Ure, Karen Malcolm, Christian Marbiessen,and Michael OToole for their useful comments on the article. I am particularlygrateful to Eija Ventola as the organiser of the 16th International SystemicCongress in Helsinki in 1989, for making it possible for me to give an earliervertion of this paper at the Conference.

2 Festus Iyayi (1986) Heroes. Essex: Longman and Wole Soyinka (1965) Thehaelpraers. London: Heinemann.

3. Elechi Amadi (1966) The Concubine. London: Heinemann; Elechi Amadi(1969) The Great Ponds. London: Heinemann; T. M. Aluko (1982) WrongOnes in the Dock. London: Heinemann.

4

5

Amos Tutuola (1953) The Palm Wf ne Drinkard. New Yak Grove Press.

I have done extensive work on Yoruba social interaction and on NigerianEnglish literary texts. For details, see Akindele 1986, 1988, 1990,forthcoming.

79 1

tat ti

References

.Achebe, C. 1964. Arrow of God. London: Heinemann.

Achebe, C. 1966. A Man of the People.London: Heinemann.

Adejare, W. 1981. Wale Soyinka'sSelected Literary Texts: A Text-linguistic Approach.

An unpublished PhD. thesis, University of Sheffield.

Akindele, F. 1986. Speakers' Rights in English and Yoruba English Family Discourse.

An unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Nottingham.

Akindele, F. 1988. "The structure of family conversation in Yoruba English". In:

Steiner, E. & R. Veltman (eds.). Pragmatics, Discourse and Text. London:

Pinter Publishers, 99-119.

Akindele, F. 1990. "A Socio-linguistic analysis of Yoruba greetings", Journal ofAfrican

Languages and Cultures, Vol. 2, No. 2,1 -14.

Akindele, F. (forthcoming). "Interruptions: A marker of social position?",

Anthropological linguistics.

Berry, M. H. 1981a. "Systemic linguistics and discourse analysis: A multilayered

approach to exchange Structure". In: Coulthard, M. & M. Montgomery (eds.).Studies in Discourse Analysis. London: Rouledge & Kegan Paul.

Berry, M. H. 1981b. "Polarity and propositional development and their relevance to the

well-formedness'of an exchange", Noningharn linguistic Circular, VoL 10, No.

1: 36-63.

Berry M. H. 1981c. "Towards layers of exchange structure for directive exchanges",

Network, No. 2, 23-32.

Burton, D. (1980). Dialogue and Discourse. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Butler, C. S. 1989. "Systemic models: Unity, diversity and change", Word, VoL 40,

No. 1-2, 1-36.

Coulthard, M. & Brazil, D. 1979. Exchange Structure. Discourse Analysis Monographs,

English Language Research, University of Birmingham.

Dudley-Evans, T. 1986. "Genre analysis: An investigation of the introduction and

discussion of M.Sc. dissertations". Genre Analysis. Discourse AnalysisMonographs, No. 13, English Language Research, University of Birmingham,

128 - 43.

Goffman, E. 1976. "Replies and responses", Language in Society, Vol. 5, 257-313.

Harris, S. J. 1980. Language Interaction in Magistrates' Courts, An unpublished Ph.D.

thesis, University of Nottingham.

Jefferson, G. 1972. "Side sequences". In: Sudnow, D. (ed.). Studies in SocialInteraction. New Yoric The Free Press, 294-338.

Killam, J. D. 1969. The Novels of Chinua Achebe. London: Heinemann.

Labov, W. & D. Fanshel 1972. Socio-linguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University ofPennsylvania Press.

Labov, W. & D. Fanshel 1977. Therapeutic Discourse. New Yak: Academic Press.

Martin, J. R. 1985. "Process and text: Two aspects of human semiosis". In: Benson, J.& W. Greaves (eds.). Systemic Perspectives on Discourse, Vol. 1., (Advances inDiscourse Processes). Norwood, N. J.: Ablex, 248-74.

Oshundare, N. 1979. Bilingual and bicultural aspects of Nigerian prose fiction. Anunpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto.

Oyeleye, A. L. 1985. The Language of Achebe's early novels. Unpublished Ph.D.thesis, University of Ire, Ile-Ife, Nigeria.

Palmer, E. 1972. An Introduction to the African Novel. London: Heinemann.

Sacks, H., E. A. Schegloff & G. Jefferson 1974. "A simplest systematics for theorganization of turn-taking in conversation", Language, Vol. 50, No. 4, 696-735.

Sinclair, J. M. H. & M. Coulthard 1975. Towards an Analysis of Discourse. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Ventola, E. 1979. "The structure of casual conversation in English", Journal ofPragmatics, Vol. 3, 267-98.

Veut,...la, E. 1987. The Structure of Social Interaction. London: Pinter Publishers.

Ventola, E. 1988. "The logical relations in exchanges". In: Benson, J. & W. Greaves(eds.). Functional Perspectives on Discourse. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex, 51-72.

Ventola, E. 1989. "Problems of modelling and applied issues within the framework ofgenre", Word , Vol. 40, No. 1-2, 129-162.

81

2 i